Abuse liability assessment of eslicarbazepine acetate in healthy male and female recreational sedative users: A Phase I randomized controlled trial

Acute Cognitive Effects of the Dual Orexin Receptor Antagonist Lemborexant Compared With Suvorexant and Zolpidem in Recreational Sedative Users

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

As part of a human abuse potential (HAP) study of lemborexant (LEM), the effects of therapeutic (LEM 10 mg), and supratherapeutic doses of LEM 20 mg and LEM 30 mg on cognition and psychomotor performance were compared with placebo (PBO) and supratherapeutic doses of zolpidem (ZOL) 30 mg and suvorexant (SUV) 40 mg. Subjects (n = 32) were healthy, nondependent, recreational sedative users able to discriminate the effects of both SUV and ZOL from PBO on subjective drug measures.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

The human abuse potential study was a single-dose, randomized, double-blind, PBO-controlled, 6-way crossover study. Eligible subjects admitted to the treatment phase completed the choice reaction test (CRT) and divided attention test. The CRT included measurements of recognition reaction time (RRT) and motor reaction time.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

Recognition reaction time and mean maximum change from baseline (CFB max ) scores were significantly increased (slower performance) versus PBO for all LEM doses (all P < 0.001), ZOL ( P < 0.001), and SUV ( P = 0.004), and LEM (all doses) was not statistically different from ZOL or SUV. Motor reaction time and mean CFB max versus PBO were significantly increased for all LEM doses (all P < 0.001), and ZOL ( P < 0.001) and SUV ( P < 0.001). All LEM doses showed significantly decreased (better performance) mean CFB max versus ZOL (all P < 0.001), but not SUV. Notably, all cognitive effects in the CRT and divided attention test were limited to the main treatment phase (up to 8 hours postdose).

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

All active doses of LEM, ZOL, and SUV generally increased reaction time and reduced divided attention capabilities versus PBO. However, at therapeutic/supratherapeutic doses, LEM led to significantly less cognitive impairment than supratherapeutic doses of ZOL in some measures.

Adolescents' Understanding of Opioid-Induced Euphoria Measures and Proposed Measurement Revisions

Prescription opioid misuse is an unintended consequence of acute pain management. Opioid-induced euphoria (OIE) with first therapeutic opioid exposure may influence opioid misuse. OIE is not assessed in clinical care and self-report measures of OIE have not been validated in adolescents. We (1) determined adolescents' ability to understand existing self-reported OIE measures, (2) revised measures for better understanding by this population, and (3) established initial content validity of revised measures with adolescents. Using runner's euphoria to simulate OIE in Study 1, 29 adolescents' (14 males) understanding of the Drug Effects Questionnaire (DEQ-5), the Addiction Resource Center Inventory Morphine Benzedrine Group scale (ARCI-MBG), and the ARCI Lysergic Acid Diethylamide scale (ARCI-LSD) were tested. In Study 2, 29 additional adolescents (9 males) participated in a modified Delphi study with focus groups to revise survey items to improve understanding by peers. In Study 1, runners understood <40% of ARCI-MBG and ARCI-LSD statements. In Study 2, all but 7 survey items were revised. Revised measures of OIE for adolescents may help define at-risk OIE phenotypes and validate risk assessments using survey methodology. Additional studies are needed to validate the revised OIE self-report measures with opioid-naive adolescents receiving opioids to treat acute pain.

Eslicarbazepine Acetate: A Review in Focal-Onset Seizures

Eslicarbazepine acetate (Zebinix^®), a voltage-gated sodium channel blocker, is a once-daily, orally administered anti-seizure medication available in the EU for use as monotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed focal-onset seizures and as adjunctive therapy in adults, adolescents and children aged > 6 years with focal-onset seizures. In adult patients, adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate was generally associated with a significant decrease in seizure frequency and an increase in responder rate compared with placebo. The drug was also an effective monotherapy agent in adult patients, demonstrating noninferiority to controlled-release carbamazepine, in terms of seizure freedom rates. In paediatric patients, eslicarbazepine acetate provided seizure control when administered as adjunctive therapy, with the benefits appearing to be dependent on age and dose. The antiepileptic efficacy of eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive therapy or as monotherapy was maintained during longer-term extension studies, with each extension study period being up to 2 years. Oral eslicarbazepine acetate was generally well tolerated when administered as adjunctive therapy or monotherapy in adult patients and when administered as adjunctive therapy in paediatric patients, with most adverse events being of mild or moderate intensity. In conclusion, with the convenience of once-daily administration, eslicarbazepine acetate is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment option for adults, adolescents and children aged > 6 years with focal-onset seizures.

Randomized Crossover Trial to Compare Abuse Liability of Intravenous Remimazolam Versus Intravenous Midazolam and Placebo in Recreational Central Nervous System Depressant Users

Remimazolam (RMZ) is a new and ultra-fast-acting, short-duration intravenous benzodiazepine, a drug class associated with abuse potential. This trial was designed to compare the abuse potential of remimazolam with placebo and midazolam (MDZ), a well-characterized member of the same pharmacological class in healthy, recreational drug users 18-55 years-of-age, who demonstrated good drug tolerance and were able to discriminate between midazolam and placebo. At equipotent intravenous doses selected to produce effects ranging from mild/moderate to relatively strong sedation without loss of consciousness (RMZ: 5, 10 mg versus MDZ: 2.5, 5 mg), peak scores (E_max or E_min , respectively) for drug liking, good/bad/any effects, and sedation (drowsiness and relaxation) were significantly greater than placebo for both active drugs and were broadly comparable between RMZ and MDZ. In contrast, areas under the effect-time curves (TA_AUE) were notably lower for RMZ versus MDZ, particularly for measures of good and any effects, reflecting the shorter duration of action and consistent with the more rapid observed plasma clearance for RMZ versus MDZ and the lack of an active RMZ metabolite. Scores for willingness to take drug again were also lower for RMZ versus MDZ, but not significantly so. We concluded that the abuse potential of RMZ is comparable to or lower than that of MDZ, a drug known to have a low potential for intravenous abuse.

Abuse potential assessment of cannabidiol (CBD) in recreational polydrug users: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

RATIONALE

Treatment with a highly purified oral solution of cannabidiol (CBD), derived from the plant Cannabis sativa L., demonstrated some evidence of central nervous system (CNS)-related adverse events in patients enrolled in phase 3 trials for treatment of childhood-onset epilepsy. Cannabidiol was categorized as a Schedule 1 substance by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration; therefore, it was important to test CBD for human abuse potential.

METHODS

This was a single-dose, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled crossover trial. The abuse potential of single oral doses of plant-derived pharmaceutical formulations of highly purified CBD (Epidiolex®; 750 mg, 1500 mg, and 4500 mg) was compared with that of single oral doses of alprazolam (2 mg), dronabinol (10 mg and 30 mg), and placebo in healthy recreational polydrug users. The primary endpoint to assess abuse potential was the maximum effect (E_max) on Drug-Liking visual analog scale (VAS). Other measurements included E_max on Overall Drug-Liking VAS, Take Drug Again VAS, positive and negative effects, other subjective effects, and Drug Similarity VAS. Cognitive and psychomotor functions were assessed using the Divided Attention Test, the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised, and the Digit-Symbol Substitution Task. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for CBD and its major metabolites. Standard safety measures and adverse events were assessed.

PRINCIPAL RESULTS

Of 95 eligible subjects, 43 qualified for the treatment phase, received at least 1 dose of investigational medicinal product, and were included in safety assessments; 35 subjects were included in the pharmacodynamic analysis. Subjects receiving alprazolam and dronabinol had significantly higher Drug-Liking E_max (P < 0.0001) compared with those receiving placebo, confirming study validity. Compared with placebo, Drug-Liking was not significantly different for subjects taking 750-mg CBD (P = 0.51). Drug-Liking E_max values for 1500-mg and 4500-mg CBD were significantly different from placebo (P = 0.04 and 0.002, respectively); however, the mean differences were <10 points on VAS compared with >18-point differences between positive controls and placebo. Alprazolam and dronabinol had significantly higher Drug-Liking, Overall-Liking, and Take Drug Again VAS E_max values compared with all doses of CBD (P ≤ 0.004). In contrast to alprazolam, CBD administration had no observable effect on cognitive/psychomotor tests. Pharmacokinetic parameters for CBD in this trial were consistent with previous studies. The majority of adverse events reported during the trial were of mild or moderate severity; no serious adverse events or deaths were reported.

CONCLUSION

Administration of a therapeutic dose of CBD (750 mg) showed significantly low abuse potential in a highly sensitive population of polydrug users. Although high and supratherapeutic doses of CBD (1500 mg and 4500 mg, respectively) had detectable subjective effects compared with placebo; the effects were significantly lower than those observed with alprazolam and dronabinol.

Human abuse potential of brivaracetam in healthy recreational central nervous system depressant users

BACKGROUND

Brivaracetam is a new antiepileptic drug indicated for adjunctive treatment of focal seizures in adults at a dose of 50-200mg/day taken in two equal doses. The objective of this study was to evaluate the abuse potential of brivaracetam compared with alprazolam (positive control), placebo, and levetiracetam.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, crossover study in healthy male and female recreational central nervous system (CNS) depressant users aged 18-55years, who could distinguish between the subjective effects of alprazolam 2mg and placebo. All participants received single doses of brivaracetam (50 [therapeutic dose], 200, 1000mg [supratherapeutic doses]), alprazolam (1.5, 3mg), placebo, and levetiracetam (4000mg) in random order each separated by 7-10days. Subjective Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) and Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI) scales were completed at intervals up to 24h postdose. Primary endpoints were Drug Liking (at this moment) VAS, Overall Drug Liking VAS, Feeling High VAS, and ARCI Pentobarbital Chlorpromazine Alcohol Group (PCAG, sedation) maximum effect (E_max). Maximum effect values on each scale were analyzed using a mixed-effect model (per protocol population, N=44).

RESULTS

The maximum effect for both alprazolam doses was significantly greater versus placebo for six designated endpoints, confirming study validity. Drug Liking (at this moment) VAS E_max was significantly lower for brivaracetam 50mg than alprazolam (both doses); there were no significant differences between brivaracetam 200mg and alprazolam (both doses), and brivaracetam 1000mg and alprazolam 1.5mg. Brivaracetam 1000mg (supratherapeutic single dose) had significantly higher Drug Liking (at this moment) VAS E_max than alprazolam 3mg. Overall, Drug Liking VAS E_max for brivaracetam 50 and 200mg was not significantly different from alprazolam (both doses). Brivaracetam 1000mg had significantly higher Overall Drug Liking VAS E_max than alprazolam 1.5mg, but was not significantly different from alprazolam 3mg. Feeling High VAS E_max was lower versus alprazolam with brivaracetam 50 and 200mg, while brivaracetam 1000mg was comparable with alprazolam (both doses). Addiction Research Center Inventory PCAG E_max for brivaracetam (all doses) was significantly lower than alprazolam (both doses). On the secondary/supportive endpoints, compared with alprazolam, brivaracetam had fewer positive effects (ARCI Morphine Benzedrine Group [euphoria]; Good Drug Effects VAS [50mg]) and fewer negative effects (Bad Drug Effects VAS; ARCI Lysergic Acid Diethylamide [dysphoria]). Brivaracetam was not significantly different from alprazolam for Take Drug Again VAS (50, 200mg). For most endpoints, brivaracetam (50-200mg) was not significantly different from levetiracetam (4000mg).

CONCLUSION

This study in healthy recreational CNS depressant users showed that single doses of brivaracetam 50mg (therapeutic single dose) had lower sedative, positive, and negative drug effects than alprazolam, while brivaracetam 200 and 1000mg (supratherapeutic single doses) were more similar to alprazolam. The subjective profile of brivaracetam appeared to be similar to that of levetiracetam, but further evaluation using a range of levetiracetam doses would be needed to confirm similar abuse potential.

When adverse effects are seen as desirable: Abuse potential of the newer generation antiepileptic drugs

There has been growing recognition of the possible abuse potential of newer generation antiepileptic drugs, and several of these agents have been categorized as controlled substances in the United States. To properly schedule a new medication, the abuse potential, or the potential for a drug to be used for its nonmedical positive subjective effects, must be determined. Performing a human abuse potential study is one step in the overall abuse potential assessment. These studies analyze the abuse potential of a new drug in a very specific population of known recreational drug users. Studying the test drug in this population enables a more meaningful assessment of abuse, and likely represents the population most probable to abuse. In these double-blind, single-dose, active and placebo controlled studies subjects may report their subjective liking, estimated street value, and rate euphoric or depressive sensations of the test drug compared with placebo and scheduled active comparators with a known abuse potential. In order to provide an enhanced understanding of the abuse potential assessment and how it relates to controlled substance scheduling, this review will examine the human abuse potential studies of perampanel, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and brivaracetam.